This meeting has been convened for the purpose of considering Committee Stage of the Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill 2003. I welcome the Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, and his officials to the meeting. I refer Deputies to the timetable circulated with the agenda. It is proposed to consider this Bill until9 p.m. today, with a break from 5 p.m. to 6 p.m. We will resume at 10.30 a.m. tomorrow morning in accordance with the timetable. If required, we can also meet on Thursday and Friday. Is this agreed?
Business of Select Committee.
It would suit me better if we took a break for half an hour and rose at8.30 p.m.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
Are you seeking to agree times for tomorrow?
We will start at 10.30 a.m. and we have not indicated a finishing time.
I have a problem with the Order of Business. While tomorrow does not pose a serious problem, I will take the Order of Business for Fine Gael on Thursday as our leader will be absent. We ought to be present for Leaders' Questions so that we can fulfil our other parliamentary duties for the week. Perhaps this could be accommodated.
I will not provide an obstacle to the accommodation of another Deputy. I am leader in the House today and will participate in Leaders' Questions. This is a difficulty we all have to address. I could only arrange to absent myself from this meeting for the duration of Leaders' Questions this afternoon. I wonder what the response of the committee would be if I asked for a sos for 20 minutes for Leaders' Questions this afternoon. It is equally difficult for me to be in two places at the one time.
The only thing we have agreed so far is to take the half hour break this evening, nothing has been agreed for tomorrow.
I wish to support Deputy Bruton in performing his role as leader. I am just as interested and committed to the work of this committee and ask that it consider taking a 20 or 30 minute sos today. While I know this will interrupt the flow, I have the same difficulty and have to be in the Dáil chamber at 4.15 p.m. this afternoon.
We will hear the observations first.
Perhaps we could compromise and allow a 20 minute sos at the time Deputy Ó Caoláin suggested and another 20 minute sos some time after 6 p.m. That would give two short breaks in what would otherwise be a long sitting. I assume we, the Minister, Deputy Nolan, and you, Chairman, will be here for most of the day. The time can be added on tomorrow, Thursday or Friday because we are free to go as long as we wish on those days.
As regards the mornings, I thought the committee had agreed that, as spokespeople on finance Leaders' Questions at 10.30 a.m. were important. We discussed this matter previously. The agreement we made then should stand. It is difficult for all of us not to be in the Dáil in the morning. The same may apply to the Minister. Because Leaders' Questions are televised, people might not appreciate that we are in the House. I thought we had an agreement about committee meetings. I propose that tomorrow morning's proceedings should start immediately after Leaders' Questions and that we sit later tomorrow, Thursday or Friday to make up for lost time. I am happy to accommodate people.
The 20 minute time limit is cutting it fine, particularly when one is the last of the leaders in this afternoon's slot. A half an hour would allow one to be there and to get back.
Can anyone from the Deputy's party substitute for him at this committee?
Being tied to the Dáil timetable defeats the purpose of committees meeting in committee rooms.
There is an easy solution. The Minister could accept the amendments and we could go away happy.
The length of time we will be here will depend on how long people discuss particular issues. What suggestions have been proposed?
We should adjourn at 4.15 p.m. for 30 minutes. I have asked for only an additional ten minutes on the earlier proposal.
The Deputy wants to adjourn at 4.15 p.m. for 40 minutes.
For 30 minutes. I support Deputy Burton's view that what we talk about on Wednesday mornings affects us universally and that we should commence immediately after Leaders' Questions at approximately 11.10 a.m.
The proposal is that we commence on Wednesday after Leaders' Questions. What time are they completed?
Approximately 11.10 a.m.
There are then questions to the Taoiseach, but members do not need to be in the Chamber for that.
No.
Members need only be there for Leaders' Questions which are completed at approximately 11.10 a.m.
Will it be 11 o'clock on Thursday?
It is proposed to start at 11 o'clock instead of 10.30 a.m. on Thursday. There is no Order of Business on Friday, which is a special sitting day. Members want to adjourn at 4.15 p.m. today for 30 minutes and to take a 30 minute sos instead of an hour at 5.30 p.m. What time is it proposed to finish this evening?
At 8.30 p.m.
We are taking a half an hour off the committee time today. We are proposing to start at 11.10 a.m. on Wednesday instead of 11.30 a.m. We will lose 40 minutes tomorrow. We are proposing to start at 11 o'clock instead of 10.30 a.m. on Thursday. We are losing approximately 30 minutes each day. Is it possible to get agreement on that? Are we happy with that arrangement? We will adjourn for 30 minutes at 4.15 p.m. and 5.30 p.m. We will complete the proceedings at 8.30 p.m. We will start immediately after Leaders' Questions tomorrow morning, which will be shortly after 11 o'clock, and we will start at 11 o'clock instead of 10.30 a.m. on Thursday. Does the Minister agree with that timetable?
The grouping list of amendments has been circulated for the information of members. Can we get agreement on the grouping list? All amendments will be moved separately, but because some of them are related they can be grouped for discussion purposes to avoid unnecessary duplication. That is normal on Committee Stage. Can I get agreement on the grouping schedule as provided by the Bills Office to the committee today? I am sure it has exercised its normal professional judgment in this regard. Is the grouping schedule agreed?
I have not been able to go through it in detail.
I am accepting it in good faith from the Bills Office.
Alternatives are proposed in some instances which means that if one amendment is made, another one ceases to be relevant. We are looking for a full loaf in some cases and a half loaf in others. I presume you, Chairman, will be able to facilitate a debate if the Minister does not accept the amendment moved.
There can always be a debate on the section as opposed to the amendment. We will now proceed with consideration of the Bill.